Re: [ORG-discuss] IP Bill - the HUBS amendment

Is Liberty and or the Law Society working on those parallel reconstruction arguments? C > William Waites > 4 May 2016 at 15:31 > To follow this up, this amendment was debated yesterday (p. 679 > [1]). Apart from a technical point, the Minister for Security was >

Re: [ORG-discuss] IP Bill - the HUBS amendment

To follow this up, this amendment was debated yesterday (p. 679 [1]). Apart from a technical point, the Minister for Security was worried that it would have unintended consequences: that criminals would seek out small providers to avoid surveillance. This argument is of course specious. There are

[ORG-discuss] IP Bill - the HUBS amendment

Greetings everyone. There are many problems with the new suspicionless spying bill as we all know very well. Some of you who know me may also know that I am the network operator of HUBS [1] which is made up of several small community ISPs in rural Scotland. Whatever else is wrong with the bill,